This type of dualism describes that <u>each mind is a distinct nonphysical res</u>, an individual cluster of nonphysical substance, a thing whose properties are independent of a body that may be "connected". According to her, mental states come from these same non-physical, distinct and unique properties of substance.
A division of reality into two basic types of substance: the first was the ordinary type that had the characteristic of occupying a place in space, having length, width and height. Although the connotation of the material substance seemed to have no importance, it was largely exacerbated by Descartes, where his writings would serve as the basis for Newton's mechanical extrapolations.
However, there was a substance that was beyond its reach of explanation by mechanics. This substance was human conscious reason. This meant that Descartes proposed a different type of substance. A substance without extension or place in space, where its essential characteristic was the human activity of thinking.
The most acceptable point of the theory is that the mind and body performed different functions, and the most acceptable criticism is that the two worked together.
I believe it is a good theory, but the truth is that it is an erroneous theory, but for the time it was a revolution and it was from there that one began to understand the concept of what would be the "mind". The solution is that the theory is wrong, but it has led to great achievements today.
They speek <span>English (official), Kiswahili (official), numerous indigenous languages</span>
Free market is run by the firms and households mainly. They control where resources are allocated, to which products production. There is minimal or no government intervention in the Free market economy. All the government can really do is policing, maximum.
Social market economy is like a combination of planned economy and free market economy, run by all three: households, firms and the government. The government has more power in this, it can do more things, it has more control. There is more government intervention in this economy than in a free market economy.
Answer:
I believe that the answer is, 'People began to study nature and natural laws.'
Explanation:
'Fewer scientific achievements were made.'
No, the Renaissance was known for its scientific advances.
'Science was used to prove religious teachings.'
No, people were focused on science, which at the time seemed like an unmixable concept with religion.
'Discoveries were influenced by religious thought.'
No, again, people were looking towards science at rapid rates during this time.
If I understand what you are asking, climate changed in the past because, just as now, there were greenhouse gas emissions. The key difference is that in the past, the way the green house gases circulated was natural<span>. The climate change threatened the organisms over time and will continue to do so in our future and present.</span>
